Elie observed and recorded the sounds the zebra finches made and classified the calls according to the situation and the bird that made them. Elie observed and recorded the sounds the zebra finches made and classified the calls according to the situation and the bird that made them. A scientist who decoded the dictionary that a bird uses to communicate has won a $100,000 prize for making progress towards a world in which humans can talk to the animals - without being met with a blank response. Dr Julie Elie at the University of California, Berkeley, was awarded the 2026 Coller-Dolittle prize for two-way interspecies communication after working out the 11 core calls in the zebra finch vocabulary and their meanings. Her work revealed how the birds announce who they are and what they are doing, and recognise one another regardless of what they are saying by using individual signatures.

We study the problem of robust estimation under heterogeneous corruption rates, where each sample may be independently corrupted with a known but non-identical probability. This setting arises naturally in distributed and federated learning, crowdsourcing, and sensor networks, yet existing robust estimators typically assume uniform or worst-case corruption, ignoring structural heterogeneity. For mean estimation for multivariate bounded distributions and univariate gaussian distributions, we give tight minimax rates for all heterogeneous corruption patterns. For multivariate gaussian mean estimation and linear regression, we establish the minimax rate for squared error up to a factor of d, where d is the dimension. Roughly, our findings suggest that samples beyond a certain corruption threshold may be discarded by the optimal estimators - this threshold is determined by the empirical distribution of the corruption rates given.

On Monday morning, a jury in Oakland, California, announced its verdict in one of the most-watched tech feuds between billionaire Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. The nine-member jury handed a decisive victory to Altman, saying Musk had waited too long to bring his claims against the artificial intelligence company and its top executives. Musk, who cofounded OpenAI as a nonprofit, had filed a $150bn lawsuit against the organisation, Altman and its president, Greg Brockman, accusing them of turning it into a for-profit entity for personal enrichment. Instead, the case became focused on a procedural issue. After deliberating for less than two hours, the jury unanimously found that the statute of limitations had expired before Musk filed the lawsuit in 2024, meaning jurors concluded he had waited too long to bring his claims under the applicable legal deadline.

Elon Musk loses case against Sam Altman over OpenAI's overhaul Elon Musk arrives at the Ronald V. Dellums Federal Building for court in Oakland, California on April 30. A jury rejected Elon Musk's claims that OpenAI under Sam Altman's leadership betrayed its mission to benefit the public by morphing into a for-profit business, finding that he waited too long to sue the company. The verdict reached Monday in federal court in Oakland, California, follows a trial over the bitter feud between the entrepreneurs who worked together to launch the startup in 2015. OpenAI has since evolved into one of the world's most valuable and powerful artificial intelligence companies. "I think there is a substantial amount of evidence to support the jury's findings," U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said when she accepted the nine-member jury's unanimous conclusion after about two hours of deliberations.

Elon Musk, left, and Sam Altman. Elon Musk, left, and Sam Altman. How Sam Altman's victory over Elon Musk clears way for OpenAI's trillion-dollar ambitions OpenAI's plans now seem all but guaranteed, given that the world's richest man couldn't put a stop to them On Monday morning, a jury in Oakland, California, handed a resounding victory to Sam Altman and OpenAI in their long, bitter courtroom battle with Elon Musk. The federal jury found Altman, OpenAI and its president, Greg Brockman, not liable for Elon Musk's claims that they unjustly enriched themselves and broke a founding contract made with Musk when founding the startup. The unanimous verdict, delivered after less than two hours of deliberation, is a stark rebuke of Musk and his lawyer's claims that Altman "stole a charity" through his leadership of OpenAI.

The federal jury in Oakland, California, found Altman, OpenAI and its president, Greg Brockman, not liable for Elon Musk's claims that they unjustly enriched themselves and broke a founding contract made with Musk when founding the startup. The verdict, delivered after less than two hours of deliberation, is a stark rebuke of Musk and his lawyer's claims that Altman "stole a charity" through his leadership of OpenAI . It also provides the AI firm with a clear path ahead to pursue going public later this year at about a $1tn valuation . The jury's finding is a non-binding, advisory verdict that left Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers with ultimate power to issue her own ruling in the case. Gonzalez Rogers immediately said that she would agree with the jury's decision and dismissed Musk's claims.

A United States jury has ruled against Elon Musk in his lawsuit against OpenAI, finding the artificial intelligence (AI) company not liable to the world's richest person for having allegedly strayed from its original mission to benefit humanity. In a unanimous verdict on Monday, the jury in Oakland, California US federal court said Musk had brought his case too late. Following the verdict, Musk's lawyer said he reserved the right to appeal, but the judge suggested he may have an uphill battle because whether the statute of limitations ran out before Musk sued was a factual issue. "There's a substantial amount of evidence to support the jury's finding, which is why I was prepared to dismiss on the spot," US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said. Musk was a co-founder of OpenAI, the company that launched in 2015 and went on to create ChatGPT.

The nine-member panel took only two hours to return a verdict in favor of OpenAI on Monday, which the judge quickly adopted as her own final decision. Elon Musk suffered the worst defeat possible in his legal battle against OpenAI as a federal jury and a judge ruled he waited too long to bring his claims against the AI startup and its top executives, Sam Altman and Greg Brockman. The jury's decision was a nonbinding recommendation sent to US district judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, though she immediately accepted it on Monday as her own, making it final. The nine-member panel delivered the unanimous verdict in an Oakland, California courtroom after deliberating for under two hours. They found that statutes of limitations expired well before Musk filed his lawsuit in 2024.

OpenAI's CEO, Sam Altman, arrives at the federal courthouse in Oakland, California, on Thursday. OpenAI's CEO, Sam Altman, arrives at the federal courthouse in Oakland, California, on Thursday. Nine-person jury to consider whether AI firm bilked world's richest person and unjustly enriched themselves Closing arguments began on Thursday in Elon Musk's lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI, bringing the weeks-long courtroom battle between the two tech moguls nearer to a decision. A nine-person jury is set to deliberate and return a verdict on whether they believe the AI firm and Altman are liable in the case. The trial, which began last month in an Oakland, California, federal courthouse, has gripped Silicon Valley and featured some of the tech industry's biggest names as witnesses.

Are you married to a man who's obsessed with AI? If i had to listen to another minute of my husband talking about Claude Code, I might have actually died. It was 11 pm in Berkeley, California, where I was home alone with our 10-month-old daughter, and 2 am in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he was visiting for his newish job in AI. "JUST LOOK AT THIS!" he shouted. The FaceTime camera zoomed toward a laptop sitting on a hotel bed. I still had to take the dog out. "ARE YOU LOOKING?" he shouted again. I was looking at our real baby. There are two babies in this household now: the small human one and the large language model.